All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Navigation

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to
use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Please Log In to Continue

You're about the fifth person to ask that. Seems people really want to mess with MakeMaker.:)

Most likely. There's talk of instead of keeping a separate repository, for very core-centric modules like MakeMaker and ExtUtils::Install to instead just fork off the perl repository on github [github.com]. This will make p5p and CPAN coordination much easier.

One showstopper, now resolved, was that the perl repo is rather large and forking it would eat up a big chunk of a free account's quota. Turns out forking is about 15

Because I like GitHub, I like the people, they've been nice to Perl (they approached us to mirror in the Perl repo) and it's a whole lot more than just a place to host my git repositories. I don't want to knock repo.or.cz, they're doing a great service, but if you think J Random Server running the stock git server is a replacement for GitHub, you really haven't looked at GitHub.

[Incoming rant. Not necessarily at you, but you triggered a soft spot. And I'm sorry for ragging on repo.or.cz, they're doing a

It seems to me that a zealous Open Source/Free Software advocate would be glad to see discrimination against proprietary software packages, forcing their producers to pay while Open Source folks go free.

But what do I know?

--J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers

Apparently just doing a simple fast forward merge is not cool enough, so a cherry pick with a signoff is done instead, meaning that your contributer now has to do a git reset --hard or they will run git pull and accidentally create a merge commit merging their changes with... you guessed it, their changes. Great =P

Please just use git remote add foo git://github.com/foo/project.git and then git remote update and git merge. It's just as easy, and actually works.

You seem to be assuming you're always going to be pulling in all their changes, in which case a merge might be better, but otherwise a cherry-pick and sign off is correct. They could detect that you're asking for all changes and do a merge, sounds like simple a feature request to me. And hey, here it is [github.com].

Worrying about the fiddly technical details of how they do their merge, fiddly technical details which could change tomorrow, fiddly technical details which really don't have that big an impact, is missing